For someone with 13 years routing and switching experience I feel like an idiot, because I cannot get a simple set up to work. Any help would be appreciated!

OK, Router Board 433, Router OS 5.14.

Ether1 IP Address 192.168.10.10 Subnet Mask 255.255.0.0 (or /16); Laptop connected to the ether1 IP is 192.168.10.200/16

Ether 2 IP Address 192.168.0.1/16; Multiple stations connected to ether2 with IPs 192.168.0.X/16 with default gateway of 192.168.0.1 on all radios.

With nothing but dynamic routes in routing table cannot ping ether1 from laptop, and cannot ping ether2 from stations.

Added route 192.168.0.0/16, gateway ether2, and preferred source 192.168.10.10. I am then able to ping ether 2 from the stations.

Problem - attempted to add route 192.168.10.0/16 but it will not let me add the route, it will let me add 192.168.10.0/24, and it will let me add 192.168.10.200, but not 192.168.10.0/16. PLEASE can someone explain this issue to me, why I cannot add the same subnet mask on a different network, does mikrotik only route between different network with different subnet masks, masks cannot be the same? What gives?

Added route 192.168.10.200, gateway ether1 preferred source 192.168.0.1. Can now ping ether1 which is directly connected to the laptop.

Cannot ping ether 2 from laptop

Cannot ping ether1 or the laptop from the stations.

I have tried adding a bridge, stops pings, have added ethernet ports to the bridge, no go, tried OSPF, no go, tried RIP, no go, tried different routes, too many to list, no go.

I have read all the available documentation on the Mikrotik website, and as far as I can tell, this should work.

Can anyone tell me what I am doing wrong, and why I cannot get these networks to route via this board?

Thanks

Have you tried different masks? A /16 assumes everything is on the same physical network - which a bridge or a simple switch can handle.

From your example /24 masks would be more appropriate.

An export from your device can also help others see what your configure is.

you cant have the same /16 on two different interfaces. the local machine will not send the traffic to the router for anything on that 192.168.x.x because it thinks its local. a machine will arp for anything in its own subnet instead of sending it to the default gateway.

Have you tried different masks? A /16 assumes everything is on the same physical network - which a bridge or a simple switch can handle.

From your example /24 masks would be more appropriate.

An export from your device can also help others see what your configure is.

Yes, I have tried configuring the laptop with a 16 bit mask, and the stations with a 24 bit mask, AND the reverse of that. Still unable to ping through the router in either case.

I have also tried a 24 bit mask on both, and still unable to ping through the router.

I will get an export and post it shortly.

you cant have the same /16 on two different interfaces. the local machine will not send the traffic to the router for anything on that 192.168.x.x because it thinks its local. a machine will arp for anything in its own subnet instead of sending it to the default gateway.

OK this makes sense, however, I have tried a 16 bit bask on the laptop and the router, on ether1, and a 24 bit mask on the stations and ether2, still no go.

As stated in my previous post I also reversed the masks, and still no ping through.

Here is the logic behind the 16 bit mask. OK, 192.168.0.0/16 is a .0 subnet and a 192.168.10.0/16 is on the .10 subnet, two different networks. if I use a 24 bit mask, then all the router sees is x.x.x.1-254, and has no way of distinguishing that a 192.168.10.150 is on a different subnetwork as 192.168.0.151.

The mask covers the third octet and so the router does not recognize it.

A colleague of mine and I discussed this aspect, and made the choice for 16 bit mask over 24, however I have tried both on 16 and 24 bit masks on both ports as well as on one or the other, and the results are still the same, I cannot ping past the router.

I cannot even ping the IP ether1 from a station, or ether2 from the laptop.

Also, thanks for the responses, it's good to have someone else helping with this!

you cant have the same /16 on two different interfaces. the local machine will not send the traffic to the router for anything on that 192.168.x.x because it thinks its local. a machine will arp for anything in its own subnet instead of sending it to the default gateway.

OK this makes sense, however, I have tried a 16 bit bask on the laptop and the router, on ether1, and a 24 bit mask on the stations and ether2, still no go.

As stated in my previous post I also reversed the masks, and still no ping through.

Here is the logic behind the 16 bit mask. OK, 192.168.0.0/16 is a .0 subnet and a 192.168.10.0/16 is on the .10 subnet, two different networks. if I use a 24 bit mask, then all the router sees is x.x.x.1-254, and has no way of distinguishing that a 192.168.10.150 is on a different subnetwork as 192.168.0.151.

The mask covers the third octet and so the router does not recognize it.

A colleague of mine and I discussed this aspect, and made the choice for 16 bit mask over 24, however I have tried both on 16 and 24 bit masks on both ports as well as on one or the other, and the results are still the same, I cannot ping past the router.

I cannot even ping the IP ether1 from a station, or ether2 from the laptop.

Also, thanks for the responses, it's good to have someone else helping with this!

If the mask is /16 the devices will not think they are are different networks, so the router will not see the traffic or route it. The /16 covers all of 192.168.0.0 to 192.168.255.255 so they would be in the same broadcast domain. If you assign /24 masks to all devices, and on ether1 and ether2 assign addresses for the respective networks(and set them to a /24) then the router will route the data between the 192.168.0.0/24 and the 192.168.10.0/24 networks unless you have a firewall or some other sort of filter enabled.

OK, I see what you are saying, I will give that a try and see if it routes.

I have been able to get it to work. This is how!

Laptop IP - 172.20.30.200/16 with default gateway 172.20.30.10 connected to ether1 - IP 172.20.30.10

Stations, 192.168.0.x/24 with default gateway 192.168.0.1, connected to ether2 - IP 192.168.0.1/24

Added routes - 192.168.0.0/24; gateway ether2 preferred source 172.20.30.10
172.20.0.0/16; gateway ether1 preferred source 192.168.0.1

I can now ping through to the stations from the Laptop (that will eventually be a server) to the stations, and from all stations to laptop.

Success!

I REALLY APPRECIATE THE SUBNET MASK AND ROUTING CLARIFICATION.......I'm shouting it because I want you to hear me, and I mean it sincerely, I still struggle after all these years, and so do my colleagues with the logic of subnet masks to subnetworks, and it is always a huge help to have someone that knows it better than me, to straighten me out.....thanks!!

So next problem to solve now that I have it routing, is to get it routing like your example, between two 16 bit networks, either that or get the admin to change the stations to a 24 bit network.

The problem after that, is that the stations are actually wireless network devices, that have Mikrotik router boards in them. The network admin that I am dealing with is struggling getting winbox to discover across the router (a mikrotik router) but he has to keep the networks separate, and keep the radios/stations from broad/multicasting, over the server/laptop side of the network.

Although he still has to access the stations/radios with winbox. I am having trouble getting winbox to discover past the router.

However that is my issue, because I usually do not post until I have read all the documentaiton available, which I have yet to do on this subject.

Long and short of it is that it was my misunderstanding with subnet masks and gateways that prevented it from working, not the routerboard!

Also, on my laptop you were correct about the broadcast vs. routing issue, windows HAS TO HAVE ether1 as its default gateway, or it will not even ping any devices past it! So thanks again!